Trial reportTranslational vision science & technology2023
Visual Field Pointwise Analysis of the Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Weight Trial (IIH:WT).
Trial report in Translational vision science & technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Weight Management Interventions for Adults With Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Practice Recommendations.Neurology · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Stenting versus shunting in sight-threatening idiopathic intracranial hypertension: genuine equipoise.Practical neurology · 2026Review
- Managing idiopathic intracranial hypertension in the eye clinic.Eye (London, England) · 2024Review
- Does a Healthy Weight Body Mass Index at Onset of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Change the Outcomes? A United Kingdom Prospective Cohort Study.Neuro-ophthalmology (Aeolus Press) · 2024Article
- Idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a step change in understanding the disease mechanisms.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: This study was designed to determine if point analysis of the Humphrey visual field (HVF) is an effective outcome measure for people with idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) compared with mean deviation (MD). Methods: Using the IIH Weight Trial data, we performed a pointwise analysis of the numerical retinal sensitivity. We then defined a medically treated cohort as having MDs between -2 dB and -7 dB and calculated the number of points that would have the ability to change by 7 dB. Results: The HVF 24-2 mean ± SD MD in the worse eye was -3.5 ± 1.1 dB (range, -2.0 to -6.4 dB). Total deviation demonstrated a preference for the peripheral and blind spot locations to be affected. Points between 0 dB and -10 dB demonstrated negligible ability to improve, compared with those between -10 dB and -25 dB. For the evaluation of the feasibility for a potential medical intervention trial, only 346 points were available for analysis between -10 dB and -25 dB bilaterally, compared with 4123 points in baseline sensitivities of 0 to -10 dB. Conclusions: Patients with IIH have mildly affected baseline sensitivities in the visual field based on HVF analyzer findings, and the majority of points do not show substantial change over 24 months in the setting of a randomized clinical trial. Most patients with IIH who are eligible for a medical treatment trial generally have the mildest affected baseline sensitivities. In such patients, pointwise analysis offers no advantage over MD in detection of visual field change.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.